Well, in that case, I should make one more point:

As a designer, one of my concerns is that, by letting the manufacturer
panelize, they are going to focus on their own considerations and not so
much on the material yield (the most boards you can get out of the same
size panel). Especially in a "cost+plus" situation where the board is
considered a component, and gets a corresponding percentage markup for the
assembler who buys it, adding cost is actually a benefit for them (I'm not
sure how common that is, but I have been there).
I've even experienced a company that insisted on making some pallets in
multiples of ten because the orders were typically in multiples of ten,
(and "they are easier to count").
I'm NOT kidding...

best wishes,
Jack

.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Phil Nutting
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Jack,
>
> Chuckling, both!  I'm saddled with the "system", but want to find a better
> way (Oh ya, the industry standard).
>
> I "get it", but my thoughts (based upon my 40 years of experience and the
> info of all my knowledgeable friends on  Technet) are not always accepted
> by those making the rules.
>
> What you and others have provide is going to be used to attempt to show
> them the light.
>
> Wish me luck.
>
> Phil
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jack Olson
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 11:00 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [TN] singulation or depanelization of circuit boards
>
> It seems like your question contains two different preferences
>
> 1) "we insist on supplying the bare boards" (which means you force your
> supplier to live with whatever panel/pallette design decisions you've made)
> 2) "like to be able to send gerbers... receive perfect product" (which
> allows them some flexibility in adapting your design to their process
> parameters)
>
> so, which is it?
>
> If you chose the latter in the past, and your supplier's inexperience
> caused some "learning curve" waste or yield problems, you shouldn't have to
> pay or care about that, and they should be pro-active about fine-tuning it
> (especially since you have given them the freedom to palletize the way they
> want it).
> Regardless, They should still be shipping you perfect product. That's MY
> opinion, anyway.
>
> onward thru the fog,
> Jack
>
>
> .
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 15:13:14 -0400, Phil Nutting <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >As we move forward we are finding that each Contract Manufacturer wants
> panelization and depanelization requirements that are unique to them.  Part
> of the problem is we insist on supplying the bare boards due to previous
> issues with past CMs.  Some CMs destroyed boards that were V-grooved, some
> can't make the mouse bites work.  I'm looking for guidance on solving this.
> >
> >I'd like to be able to send the gerbers to the CM, have them get the
> panels made, build them, singulate them and ship me "perfect" product.  Am
> I asking too much?
> >
> >Phil Nutting
> >Design for Manufacturing Engineer
> >Kaiser Systems, Inc.
> >126 Sohier Road
> >Beverly, MA 01915
> >Phone: 978-922-9300 x1310
> >Fax: 978-922-8374
> >e-mail: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> >www.kaisersystems.com<http://www.kaisersystems.com>
> >www.linkedin.com/in/philnutting<http://www.linkedin.com/in/philnutting>
> >
> >
> >________________________________
> >Note: All the information contained in this e-mail and its attachments is
> proprietary to Kaiser Systems, Inc. and it may not be reproduced without
> the prior written permission of sender. If you have received this email in
> error, please immediately return it to sender and delete the copy you
> received.
> >
> >
> >______________________________________________________________________
> >This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> >For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
> >[log in to unmask]
> >______________________________________________________________________
>
>


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________